Jump to content

Dish Network/Boost Mobile cell/5G buildout thread


PythonFanPA

Recommended Posts

35 minutes ago, Jenn_3012 said:

Could you explain how would virtualizing both the enodeB and the RRU help in the urban settings?

Thanks in advance!

If they virtualize both the ended and RRU there will only be antenna panels+amplifiers on sites. Now you will need fiber or the equivalent to the sites which should not be a problem for urban areas. Not all virtualization scheme virtualize the RRU as well but present a standardized interface to the RRU from the enodeB so you can mix and match RRUs from different vendors. Now in rural areas fiber is not readily available so the virtualization scheme has to be more conservative.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Jenn_3012 said:

Could you explain how would virtualizing both the enodeB and the RRU help in the urban settings?

Thanks in advance!

In urban settings where you need a lot of sites due to capacity considerations, the more equipment you can virtualize the less rent you pay so you save on rent payments.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing I wonder is whether Dish will keep the relationship Ting Mobile has with VZW long-term, parlaying that into an LTE or NR roaming agreement for their own-brand network. If they got both T-Mobile and VZW roaming agreements set up when launching their own network, they'd almost certainly have the best mobile (home + roaming) coverage of any provider, between T-Mobile B71 and VZW B13, assuming the agreement included LTEIRA coverage (which it almost certainly would).

My bet is that they signed something reasonably long-term with VZW, given that the new Ting plans allow VZW network use.

On another topic, I seriously doubt Dish will build a capacity-focused network for quite awhile. The first overlay will be enough sites to provide outdoor n71 coverage. The next set of sites they turn up will be enough density to provide outdoor coverage on n66/70, which will also give them indoor coverage on n71/26. By that point, n48 will exist, and they might have C-Band, so they'll just throw ~3.6 GHz radios on sites that need them. I would be surprised if Dish is *ever* more than the 4th-densest network in a given area, unless Fujitsu equipment is low-quality enough that they *have* to densify.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, PythonFanPA said:

Wait...what's happening with Fujitsu radios? Guess they'll be using both?

Guessing they'll get some pretty great pricing on both, as neither are major vendors on the mobile network side...haven't even heard of MTI 'til now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Dish is apparently behaving like they didn't know T-Mobile was going to drop CDMA relatively quickly post-merger:

https://www.fiercewireless.com/financial/dish-sheds-363k-wireless-subs-warns-t-mobile-3g-shutdown

This is the sorta thing that you price into your acquisition of Boost et al.; they're just posturing here to get money/devices out of T-Mobile. Or an extension to the CDMA EOL. They're weirdly silent about capacity being allocated away from Sprint on the LTE side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/22/2021 at 5:13 PM, iansltx said:

Dish is apparently behaving like they didn't know T-Mobile was going to drop CDMA relatively quickly post-merger:

https://www.fiercewireless.com/financial/dish-sheds-363k-wireless-subs-warns-t-mobile-3g-shutdown

This is the sorta thing that you price into your acquisition of Boost et al.; they're just posturing here to get money/devices out of T-Mobile. Or an extension to the CDMA EOL. They're weirdly silent about capacity being allocated away from Sprint on the LTE side.

Do we know if current Tmobile phones such as S20 Fe 5g or A71 5G would work for all of Dish Networks likely cell phone bands?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, IrwinshereAgain said:

Do we know if current Tmobile phones such as S20 Fe 5g or A71 5G would work for all of Dish Networks likely cell phone bands?

Barely. No VoNR on either so they'd have to do some weird non-QoS'd IMS thing or fall back to TMo VoLTE. Also no n26/29/70 support. But n66 and n71 are there so they *could* work, just with unimpressive performance as at launch they'd be missing 30 MHz of downlink and 15 MHz of uplink.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, IrwinshereAgain said:

Valid point.  Is that an issue with Tmobiles implementation of VoLte, a phone issue or do we have any idea?

Beats me.  I honestly don't remember how well it worked before the buy-out, as I didn't make a lot of long calls on my cell phone before COVID-19.  But it definitely irks me now.  One would think that T-Mobile would have this sorted out by now.  I'll drop a call and when I call back it'll be on CDMA.  Or I've taken to just turning off VoLTE entirely before making calls that I know, in advance, will be lengthy.  Doesn't help when someone calls me.

Beyond the lack of service in the Shentel region, lack of ability to turn off VoLTE was one of the reasons I had myself removed from ROAMAHOME.

- Trip

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Trip said:

Beats me.  I honestly don't remember how well it worked before the buy-out, as I didn't make a lot of long calls on my cell phone before COVID-19.  But it definitely irks me now.  One would think that T-Mobile would have this sorted out by now.  I'll drop a call and when I call back it'll be on CDMA.  Or I've taken to just turning off VoLTE entirely before making calls that I know, in advance, will be lengthy.  Doesn't help when someone calls me.

Beyond the lack of service in the Shentel region, lack of ability to turn off VoLTE was one of the reasons I had myself removed from ROAMAHOME.

- Trip

You could try forcing wifi calling preferred. I started doing this before my phone got VoLTE since the call quality was so much better than CDMA. And now I keep it since VoLTE on my magic box cuts out a lot. At the very least it should prevent it from dropping calls, since it should handoff to and from VoLTE.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ingenium said:

You could try forcing wifi calling preferred. I started doing this before my phone got VoLTE since the call quality was so much better than CDMA. And now I keep it since VoLTE on my magic box cuts out a lot. At the very least it should prevent it from dropping calls, since it should handoff to and from VoLTE.

Wi-Fi calling drops more often than VoLTE does, and I've yet to see it successfully hand off to the cell network.  Actually, I suspect that's part of the problem; I have Wi-Fi calling disabled on my phone, yet I seem to get a notification that Wi-Fi calling can't connect on a semi-regular basis, as if it's enabled.  I suspect T-Mobile has my phone set to ignore my preference and use Wi-Fi calling anyway.  I've taken to turning off Wi-Fi on my phone as well to get around that particular issue when I know I'm leaving the house.  I'd love to block it at the router if I could figure out how.

- Trip

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 2/25/2021 at 1:49 PM, Trip said:

Wi-Fi calling drops more often than VoLTE does, and I've yet to see it successfully hand off to the cell network.  Actually, I suspect that's part of the problem; I have Wi-Fi calling disabled on my phone, yet I seem to get a notification that Wi-Fi calling can't connect on a semi-regular basis, as if it's enabled.  I suspect T-Mobile has my phone set to ignore my preference and use Wi-Fi calling anyway.  I've taken to turning off Wi-Fi on my phone as well to get around that particular issue when I know I'm leaving the house.  I'd love to block it at the router if I could figure out how.

- Trip

Block the DNS lookups (return NX or something like 127.0.0.1) for epdg.epc.mnc260mcc310.pub.3gppnetwork.org and epdg.epc.mnc120.mcc310.pub.3gppnetwork.org and epdg.epc.mnc530.mcc312.pub.3gppnetwork.org

And/or block UDP outbound to 208.54.0.0/16 port 4500. You could probably just block all outbound to that subnet, but if you want to be sure it just blocks wifi calling, also restrict to that UDP port.

The latter is probably preferred, but the DNS block should work if you don't have the ability to set outbound firewall rules on your router.

Regarding the handoffs, that has always worked reliably for me. But you might have to make sure that "always on mobile data" is enabled under developer options.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, PythonFanPA said:

Looks like they're continuing their streak of buying up T-Mobile MVNOs. I wonder how they plan on unifying all of them under one brand down the line, if they plan on doing that at all.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/8/2021 at 1:45 PM, Paynefanbro said:

Looks like they're continuing their streak of buying up T-Mobile MVNOs. I wonder how they plan on unifying all of them under one brand down the line, if they plan on doing that at all.

What other ones have they bought?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • T-Mobile has saved its 28Mhz mmWave licenses by using the point to point method to do environment monitoring inside its cabinets. The attachment below shows the antennas used: https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/ApplicationSearch/applAdmin.jsp;JSESSIONID_APPSEARCH=LxvbnJuvusmIklPhKy6gVK7f9uwylrZ8LiNf3BqIKlDp3_5GxoBr!300973589!225089709?applID=14787154#   Here are the sites for Franklin county OH: https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsEntry/attachments/attachmentViewRD.jsp?applType=search&fileKey=66518254&attachmentKey=21989782&attachmentInd=applAttach
    • Yep, there is a label on the side of the box but it doesn't provide any useful info that the city doesn't already provide (Crown Castle Solutions is the franchisee). You can see my graphical interpretation of the city's dataset here.
    • T-Mobile UScellular agreement links from SEC filings: https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/821130/000110465924065665/tm2415626d2_8k.htm Look inside for main link. Credit mdav-dos1 on reddit
    • Totally agree.  In my county and surrounding counties, TM did not place n-41 on every site.  When I look at the sites in question, I probably would have not placed it there either.  I can find just a few with n-71 only and in most of those cases if you live there and know the probable usage of the residents, you would not do a full upgrade on those sites.  One site in particular is set up to force feed n-71 through a long tunnel on the Turnpike.  No stopping allowed in the tunnel. No stores, movie theaters, bathrooms, so n41 would be a waste.    n25 is not really needed either, so it is not there.  The tunnel is going through & under a mountain with more black bears than people.  TM was smart.  Get good coverage in the tunnel but do not waste many many thousands of dollars with extra unused spectrum. I also see sites with only n71 & n25.  Again this makes sense to me.  Depending on what county we are talking about, they moved much of their b25 from LTE to nr.  Some counties have more n25 than a neighboring county, but luckily, it is plenty everywhere.   When you are in a very rural area, n41 can run up the bills and then be barely used.  I am NOT finding sites that should have had n41 but TM failed to provide it.  They may have to come back later in a few years and upgrade the site to n41.  However, we just may eventually see the last little piece on Band 25 leave LTE and move to n25. I am not sure if the satellite to phone service is using band 25 G block as LTE or nr. We also can possibly have at least some AWS move from LTE to nr at some point.  Yes, everybody wants n41. it is not justified in some cases.  When I travel, I desire some decent service along the entire route but it does not have to be 1 or 2 gig download.   If I can get 50/5 on a speedtest with data that will flow and not stutter, I am very happy. Yes, they will swap out the USC gear.  TM needs to match their existing network. The USCC equipment did the job for years, but it is time to retire it.
    • Lots of time if you can get close to the pole, you will see a sticky label on the box that is low enough to read. Most of the time it warns of RF exposure but also it may have a toll free number to call if there is an issue. Sometimes there is a power company meter with the name of the user. I would be surprised if there was nothing there to help identify it.  Thinking further, if this is multi-Tenant oDAS, then maybe you might only see some name like Crown Castle or maybe even a department in the city government.   An app on your phone may show the carrier(s)
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...